shmenguin wrote:i think people who are juxtaposing themselves as martin under the premise of, "it could happen to anyone" need to re-evaluate how they deal with confrontation. maybe all the caveman has made its way out of my genes, but escalating that situation into violence is something i would never see myself doing - and i hope that's true for most people. so while zimmerman is a poor excuse for a human, and what happened to martin was awful and far more than he deserved, if i had to pick one practical takeaway from this, it's don't engage in violence - even if you're being harassed in an extreme way. once you go down that path, you lose far too much control.

I agree with you, but that thought process is usually brought about with maturity. Just like it's silly to call Martin a "child," it's just as foolish to think of him as an adult. I also think that Zimmerman lacked that same type of maturity in his effort to follow Martin.

I agree with the decision, but of course we will never know what truly happened as TM was not able to give his side of the story. Maybe GZ had his gun out pointed at TM while he was in his car or had it drawn when they met in the dark and told TM that he had the gun out and ready to use.

Also, GZ obviously had it out for young black men as evidenced by his repeated calls to 911 about young black men in the neighborhood but this trial was not allowed to introduce that information. Here's hoping the DOJ pursues this case further allowing that information to be used. GZ playing cop led to the death of another person and he should not get off scott free.

shmenguin wrote:i think people who are juxtaposing themselves as martin under the premise of, "it could happen to anyone" need to re-evaluate how they deal with confrontation. maybe all the caveman has made its way out of my genes, but escalating that situation into violence is something i would never see myself doing - and i hope that's true for most people. so while zimmerman is a poor excuse for a human, and what happened to martin was awful and far more than he deserved, if i had to pick one practical takeaway from this, it's don't engage in violence - even if you're being harassed in an extreme way. once you go down that path, you lose far too much control.

I agree with you, but that thought process is usually brought about with maturity. Just like it's silly to call Martin a "child," it's just as foolish to think of him as an adult. I also think that Zimmerman lacked that same type of maturity in his effort to follow Martin.

That's true. But it also makes it (hopefully) an effective cautionary tale for teens. There are too many crazies out there. Keep your hands to yourself.

You know, when the majority of CNN.com commenters are saying CNN is continuing to kindle reactions, exaggerate, only cover 1 side of the story, etc. it's quite obvious how the media fabricated this entire thing.

i just saw something that said that in Florida, 73% of people that kill black people walk free, implying that there is racism at work, which is all fine and good to state... but to imply it's a reflection of a racism, you would need to know the races of all the murderers who got away. Is it racism if a black person gets away with killing another black person?

I've seen several voices in the black community all saying the same thing. Every month, dozens of black men, and many children, are slaughtered on the streets of America's cities. Why doesn't anyone bat an eye when these tragedies happen? What is more "tragic"...what happened to Trayvon Martin, or six year old boys getting shot in the head just walking down the street? The difference is, this death can be directly pinned on a "white Hispanic" man.

It is somewhat troubling that everyone seems just fine with the status quo of constant death and heartbreak, but then an individual case like this garners 1000000x the outrage. Obviously, we all know the reason for that, but what is a bigger issue? A one-time instance of a "white Hispanic" like Zimmerman shooting Martin in what may have been self-defense, or dozens of innocent black people being gunned down by their own race all over the country?

A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s controversial “Kill at Will” law since George Zimmerman killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in February. The law made national headlines because it was part of a system of laws that helped keep Zimmerman out of jail for more than a month.

The study found that regardless of what race the killer was, if the victim was black they were more likely to walk free.

shafnutz05 wrote:I've seen several voices in the black community all saying the same thing. Every month, dozens of black men, and many children, are slaughtered on the streets of America's cities. Why doesn't anyone bat an eye when these tragedies happen? What is more "tragic"...what happened to Trayvon Martin, or six year old boys getting shot in the head just walking down the street? The difference is, this death can be directly pinned on a "white Hispanic" man.

It is somewhat troubling that everyone seems just fine with the status quo of constant death and heartbreak, but then an individual case like this garners 1000000x the outrage. Obviously, we all know the reason for that, but what is a bigger issue? A one-time instance of a "white Hispanic" like Zimmerman shooting Martin in what may have been self-defense, or dozens of innocent black people being gunned down by their own race all over the country?

...because that's not good business for CNN or MSN. Actually,I don't think MSN is nearly as bad as CNN in trying to create a race war. CNN is just a disgusting network.

A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s controversial “Kill at Will” law since George Zimmerman killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in February. The law made national headlines because it was part of a system of laws that helped keep Zimmerman out of jail for more than a month.

The study found that regardless of what race the killer was, if the victim was black they were more likely to walk free.

1) The difference between 59% and 73% isn't as remarkable or as significant as I think you want it to be. Those numbers are relatively close.

2) As to some of the "fuzziness" shmenguin mentioned, do we know the circumstances of all of these cases? As to the person that was shot in every single one of those scenarios, where were they and how much of a threat did they pose to the person that fired the gun?

The fact they are trying to play up this study is a joke. As I stated before, 14% is not enough of a statistical difference to be proof that "black and brown" men are victimized to a large extent over white people. Further, without knowing the details of every single one of those cases, this study is meaningless.

A Tampa Bay Times analysis of almost 200 cases — the first to examine the role of race in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” or “Kill at Will” laws — found that people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time.

Questions of race have surrounded Florida’s controversial “Kill at Will” law since George Zimmerman killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in February. The law made national headlines because it was part of a system of laws that helped keep Zimmerman out of jail for more than a month.

The study found that regardless of what race the killer was, if the victim was black they were more likely to walk free.

1) The difference between 59% and 73% isn't as remarkable or as significant as I think you want it to be. Those numbers are relatively close.

2) As to some of the "fuzziness" shmenguin mentioned, do we know the circumstances of all of these cases? As to the person that was shot in every single one of those scenarios, where were they and how much of a threat did they pose to the person that fired the gun?

The fact they are trying to play up this study is a joke. As I stated before, 14% is not enough of a statistical difference to be proof that "black and brown" men are victimized to a large extent over white people. Further, without knowing the details of every single one of those cases, this study is meaningless.

What's your null hypothesis and at what level of alpha did you test this to conclude that 14% is not statistically significant?

King Sid the Great 87 wrote:What's your null hypothesis and at what level of alpha did you test this to conclude that 14% is not statistically significant?

Here is my hypothesis. You cannot make the argument that the 14% difference in the study is due to some inherent racism in the justice system. You simply cannot.

Is it not reasonable to assume that there are a greater percentage of cases involving black "victims" where the shooter was justified under Florida's SYG law? I'm not going to start pulling statistics here, but I'm fairly certain we are all familiar with the staggering murder statistics nationwide (which would presumably be similar in Florida).

I have no clue about any of the cases that were defended under the SYG statute, so I can't say with any certitude that my hypothesis is correct. But I don't know how you can take that study and go "SEE? THIS IS PROOF THAT THE SYSTEM IS OUT TO GET BLACK FOLKS!".

Factorial wrote:NP, but you have to admit that if TM was white the chances that he would be dead now are very slim as GZ most likely would have thought nothing of him walking down the street on his way home.

True...that being said.

In the 15 months prior to Trayvon Martin being shot, there were eight burglaries committed in that same neighborhood. All of these burglaries were committed by young black men. Zimmerman was aware of this fact.

So assuming that GZ decided to keep a close eye on TM because of his skin color, there was an abnormally high amount of burglaries in recent memory, all committed by young men of color. We can argue the merits of racial profiling all day, but that was likely Zimmerman's reasoning for following TM, not any sort of inherent racism.

In the 15 months prior to Trayvon Martin being shot, there were eight burglaries committed in that same neighborhood. All of these burglaries were committed by young black men. Zimmerman was aware of this fact.

So assuming that GZ decided to keep a close eye on TM because of his skin color, there was an abnormally high amount of burglaries in recent memory, all committed by young men of color. We can argue the merits of racial profiling all day, but that was likely Zimmerman's reasoning for following TM, not any sort of inherent racism.